MP 7,1 Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1 A1991 (no more)

[Mikael H]

Affordable price point. $4,995.00. Yeah, about that...

The term I used was "more affordable price point".

But I tried configuring a Z4 with an 8-core Xeon W, 32 GB RAM, 1 TB PCIe SSD, 10GbE NICs and the most basic AMD graphics option at HP's site, and it ended up costing >$4500 without any screen. In other words the iMac Pro doesn't exactly seem to be expensive for what you get - it's more a matter of what you don't get, namely the ability to cheaply replace parts until the chassis breaks.

 

[Stephen.R]

equivalent computing platform several thousand dollars cheaper than the price of a Mac Pro, that generates a palpable difference in TCO that may be hard to compensate for just in terms of a smoother OS experience.

If everything works as well on a Windows or Linux PC, sure, it may just be a net cost saving.

When this exact same conversation can up a few weeks ago, the premise was an "alternative" at half the price of the base Mac Pro - so $3K cheaper.

I don't bill anywhere near what I assume a video editor/audio engineer is going to, but assuming a 5 year life of the machine (and discounting what ever value it has at the end vs what value the PC has at the end), a $3K extra cost on the Mac Pro means it needs to save me 40 hours of wasted time compared to the PC. That's 40 minutes a month.


As an example - part of what I provide to clients is support and mentoring for their staff, using newer technologies on their workstation, not just on their server. I'm pretty sure I've spent at least a quarter of that 5-year time-budget working out causes of and/or solutions to "random **** doesn't work, because $WINDOWS" issues for client workers just this year - and that's not getting them to do everything I do on my workstation. That's the basic environment to get them working on the project, using vagrant, a VM, getting their work visible in a running instance.

I can't even imagine how ****ing nightmarish it would be to try and run stuff like Packer (to *build* VM images) on a Windows host, when it's already a gaffa-tape scenario just to *run* them.

 

[deconstruct60]

....
You got pretty all professional segments covered. The iMac Pro is now for all of those who’ve bought MacPro’s before. Performance wise it’s a monster.
The new MacPro is now for heavy duty stuff overcoming the old MacPro in many ways.
....

That is a bit of a too broad, sweeping generalization. The iMac Pro is for a substantive portion ( not all) of those who bought Mac Pro's before. There are even a substantive number of MP 2013 users that didn't move up to the iMac Pro over the last 2 years.

The regular iMac covers another smaller group of those folks. The latest MBP 15" covers yet another smaller group of those folks. The Mac Mini yet another smaller group of those folks ( that would get substantively bigger if Apple incrementally improved the thermals coverage on next Mini iteration and allow it to get up into the 8-10 core range with next gen CPUs and had a decent enough iGPU. ) .

Collectively all four cover a big enough chunk for Apple to be happen enough with. Are they covering everyone ? No. Is it covering a large fraction of "box with slots only" people? No. The big disconnect is that the "box with slot" only folks think they were the overwhelmingly vast majority of Mac Pro buyers. It is highly likely that they are smaller block than they think (i.e., large overall market trend of far more folks buying laptops and getting work done than desktops. Even in workstation space , luggable laptops growing at paces faster than highly generic boxes. )

Those four were mainly getting transitions from folks toward the bottom 25% of the old Mac Pro market. Probably an even more significant chunk of folks who stretched budgets up to get the "old" Mac Pro. Folks whose workloads relatively haven't increased in performance demands versus improvements possible in these other form factors and have a function over form outlook then the "form" doesn't particularly matter as much. [ Apple even explicitly commented that they have seen trends of folks moving into iMacs and MBP as "Pro" user growth migrations over time. ]

The new Mac Pro is coming from the other end of that spectrum. It is going to capture more of the folks who were more so in the upper 25% of the old Mac Pro market. But even it is "passing" on the bleeding edge maximum x86 core count chasers. The key for the Mac Pro 2019 is going to be how well they do with the old 50-75% range. The old 25-50% range that are fixated on "box with slots" Apple probably has factored in as not being primarily critical to the overall Mac ecosystem.

There is a sizable hole there with probably tens of thousands in it (over a multiple year run rate), but it isn't huge relative to most of the rest of the Mac line up. The Mac Pro 2019 has healthy enough margins to make Apple not particularly miss that unit count difference. It is more of a hobby product now. If they can afford the hobby they'll keep a finger in that game.

 

[sigmadog]

Apple isn't going to make that machine but here on the forums we have to listen to people pine for it multiple times a day.

The problem, Friend, is not with those who post their opinions here, but with whoever is forcing you to read the forums.

 

[ElectricPotato]

...range that are fixated on "box with slots" Apple probably has factored in as not being primarily critical to the overall Mac ecosystem.

Apple decided prosumers will pay an extra few grand for stuff they don't want to get the stuff they do want. It is an understandable approach even if I think they are missing an opportunity. To me, the mark of success will be if they ever update it or they choose to immediately abandon it like they did with the 2013 trashcan. With PCIe 4 here now and PCIe 5 in the near future, a PCIe 3 based grater pro will look very dated very soon if Apple goes dormant again.

 

[defjam]

Lower TCO is a pretty practical "use".

I'm not sure what alternatives people use, but multiple studies over the years have shown lower TCO with Macs than comparable Windows PCs.

Usually the TCO stuff is based on a typical company with IT dept etc, but as I mentioned earlier, you also need to consider if a different platform will mean more time wasted to fix a problem.

These multiple TCO "studies" leave a lot to be desired. At the top of the list is they're closed and lack the ability to review the methodology. Second is they all seem to be case studies for a company focused on Mac management solutions which, without the ability to review the methodology, makes the results suspect.
[automerge]1574104589[/automerge]

The reason it's seen as complaining is that Apple isn't going to make that machine but here on the forums we have to listen to people pine for it multiple times a day.

No, no you do not. You are free to ignore them. It is my understanding this is a forum where users, satisfied or not, can discuss things related to the Mac pro. You may not like hearing about dissatisfaction so my recommendation to you is to ignore it.

Gruber asked Craig and Greg in an interview on stage at WWDC "why can't they just make a big tower and 'poop it out'?" and Greg answered "I think you're confusing us with a different computer company." It's not going to happen. Several frequent posters here have said that they've moved on to Windows as a result yet ironically they keep hanging around to remind everyone here that they've "moved on". It gets old for those of us who are still in the Apple ecosystem to see a bunch of people post daily about how they think our systems of choice suck. Maybe it's time for those folks to switch to a Microsoft forum and complain about the lack of a Surface Desktop Pro.

If one does not raise dissatisfaction with something then how can they effect change? I suspect the entire existence of the 7,1 is based on the dissatisfaction that was raised with the 6,1. I recall the same almost the arguments being levied against those who were dissatisfied with 6,1. If I were a betting man I would place my money on those complaints having resulted in the development of the 7,1.

Bottom line, repeating the same negative comments every day on a forum full of customers (not product managers for Apple) is perfectly reasonable to call complaining. Filling out https://www.apple.com/feedback/ with those ideas would not.

You call it complaining, others label it feedback. If you do not wish to read that feedback you're welcome to ignore it.

 

[ct2k7]

The Mac will be nice and quiet and look shiny doing its work, but yes, unless your job requires what the machine brings to the table in terms of expandability there is little practical use in plowing down money in one.

As others have pointed out multiple times over the span of this thread, there's the iMac Pro if you just need a Xeon workstation at a more affordable price point, and the regular iMac if you can do without Xeons+ECC RAM. But absolutely: Expandability is limited with these latter choices compared to a proper tower cabinet filled with commodity hardware.

I think I pointed out the problems I had with the Mac Mini and iMac Pro earlier in the thread, and expandability is one primary concern for me.

My only problem with moving to Windows will be the work which I don’t currently do on Windows.. it’s just not very portable. WSL makes things a lot easier though, I admit.

 

[goMac]

You call it complaining, others label it feedback. If you do not wish to read that feedback you're welcome to ignore it.

I think where people get annoyed is this just isn't the computer for you. That's fine, but that doesn't mean it's the computer for no one. There are a lot of people looking for a high end Mac who are excited about it.

It's not a mid end Mac. When you ask for it to be a mid end Mac, it kind of throws people who want a real, high end Mac under the bus.

Mid end Mac should be a different product. Stop dragging down the Mac Pro. It's not the same product. It doesn't sound like it's what you're looking for.

It's been more than six months. The Mac Pro isn't changing. You can offer feedback all you want, but it is what it is, and we've all had this conversation dozens of times already.

 

[deconstruct60]

Apple decided prosumers will pay an extra few grand for stuff they don't want to get the stuff they do want.

Pay thousands more to skip over the stuff don't want to get to stuff do want? Depends upon the range. I extremely doubt folks at Apple were drinking so much Cupertino kool-aid that they thought that most $3K price target folks would make a leap into the mid-upper $5k range. $6-8k going a relative smaller percentage jump up perhaps ( 1-2K of of 6k is just 16-33%. even smaller percentage for larger number. ). . But the folks at the lower historic Mac Pro range ( $2,200-2899 ) that is much higher percentage jump.

It is an understandable approach even if I think they are missing an opportunity.

That approach isn't understandable. It hasn't particularly worked on iPhones price range. ( The XR and plain 11 are much better selling than the extreme ). It is even more likely to fail ( 100% like market ups a a thousand or two higher. ). iPhone overall sales have stalled.

With 100% price increases you just loose customers in substantive amounts.

To me, the mark of success will be if they ever update it or they choose to immediately abandon it like they did with the 2013 trashcan.

The lack of faith/trust is the much bigger problem than the hardware specifics. Too many "dog ate my homework" excuses. And just plain asleep with years of inaction.

I don't think Apple immediately abandoned the MP 2013. They hoped that some technological something would get them out of the corner. But if they had started on the iMac Pro sooner it would have come sooner. In turn that could have lead to a sooner iteration on the Mac Pro. Abandoned would be active action. There was far more of just do nothing on this product and assign everyone to do other stuff.

With PCIe 4 here now and PCIe 5 in the near future, a PCIe 3 based grater pro will look very dated very soon if Apple goes dormant again.

PCIe v4 isn't a big of an issue as much as the current system is mostly stuck on a 3 year old micro-architecture ( with some glue fixes and tweaks thrown in). Two years down the road Intel will probably be back on a something reselmbing tick-tock ( with regular architectural upgrades coming). AMD would have been in that boat for longer. By 2021 there will probably a substantive gap just on base x86 performance.

Even running older software with older PCI-e add in cards will go faster in those 2021 systems then what is being released now. Not that the current system will be completely toasted in performance by then by the folks want pay to stay on the leading edge will either be paying Apple or someone else to stay on that leading edge by then. ( even the folks that have dragged their feet over last 2-4 years circling the airport for Apple to do something. If Apple goes back into a deep slumber there a substantive number of folks who will just get off at point. ).

PCIe v5 is not near future. PCI-e v4 was initially release back in 2016-17 era. Power9 systems with PCI-e v4 were shipping before the iMac Pro got release. It has been out for a while. v5 won't be as slow but it isn't really coming in mass next year either.

 

[Stephen.R]

You call it complaining, others label it feedback. If you do not wish to read that feedback you're welcome to ignore it.

Arguing with strangers on the internet that you’re not happy with what apple does is a very strange way to give Apple feedback.

 

[thisisnotmyname]

These multiple TCO "studies" leave a lot to be desired. At the top of the list is they're closed and lack the ability to review the methodology. Second is they all seem to be case studies for a company focused on Mac management solutions which, without the ability to review the methodology, makes the results suspect.
[automerge]1574104589[/automerge]

No, no you do not. You are free to ignore them. It is my understanding this is a forum where users, satisfied or not, can discuss things related to the Mac pro. You may not like hearing about dissatisfaction so my recommendation to you is to ignore it.


If one does not raise dissatisfaction with something then how can they effect change? I suspect the entire existence of the 7,1 is based on the dissatisfaction that was raised with the 6,1. I recall the same almost the arguments being levied against those who were dissatisfied with 6,1. If I were a betting man I would place my money on those complaints having resulted in the development of the 7,1.


You call it complaining, others label it feedback. If you do not wish to read that feedback you're welcome to ignore it.

This...

https://www.apple.com/feedback/

...is the way to affect change.

 

[ElectricPotato]

That approach isn't understandable.

I theorize Apple may want to concentrate on the rarified high end and hope to drag a percentage of prosumers along with it.

As the comedian Chris Rock said about OJ Simpson after imagining how OJ might feel about his ex-wife and Ron Goldman spending his money: "I don't agree with what he did, but I understand."

 

[deconstruct60]

I theorize Apple may want to concentrate on the rarified high end and hope to drag a percentage of prosumers along with it.

Concentrate on the rarified high end. Yes. Going to drag a large segment of prosumers up there too where they never were in the first place. Probably no. I extremely doubt they are banking on that. The gimped 256GB SSD basically back that up. They are not after mainstream users with that capacity. [ Contrast with the iMac Pro was doesn't go lower than a 1TB SSD ] . They are not aiming for generic mainstream workloads with that base configuration at all. Folks with big sunk costs in network? Yes. Bubba with loads of money to blow who has a large collection of data in one big pile? No.

That's why they stuffed even bigger margins in the product than usual.... because they are going to stuff substantially less in volume.

 

[thevault]

Apple feedback will change nothing complete waist of time..........🤣

 

[CWallace]

I theorize Apple may want to concentrate on the rarified high end and hope to drag a percentage of prosumers along with it.

Apple does appear to be tailoring their Pro-labled products to the feedback they are getting from the Pro Workflow Teams and those folks are probably closer to the upper-end of the user spectrum than the lower. So by default, that should mean that their needs represent a majority of general user's needs so what Apple makes "for them" should also work "for the rest of us".

That being said, as deconstruct60 has noted, that means the final product will be more expensive and that price may very well put it out of the league of many of "the rest of us". The Mac Pro appears to be the extreme case for this where the base model price and configuration is of effectively no value, though the upper-end is as close to "no limits" as a Mac has ever been. The iMac Pro base model price and configuration is a much better value, as is the new MacBook Pro 16, though both of those can also be configured into the near side of five figures if one wishes - has the wallet for it. And we've seen base price increases on the Mac Mini and iPad Pro (though we have also seen qualitative configuration improvements, as well).

 

[archimacpro]

Well, I for one would like a larger TrashCan with 1 standard PCI for graphics - I love its compactness and power compared to anything else in 2013/14. I would have had the Imacpro, but not w integrated screen. Pls make a 40" 4k that I can run at native resultion for CAD.

 

[majus]

I'm planning on using the Barclays Card financing to get 18 months to pay it off, interest free. Does the Apple card have the same offer????

The AppleCard does not offer that. Barclays does but has anyone here used the Barclays card to buy a Mac? I was thinking about it as an attractive option (in addition to vet discount) but Barclays reputation with other cardholders is very, very bad -- many online horror stories of mistreatment from people of all credit ratings. None that bought computers, however, and Apple does make it clear they are in no way involved with the Barclays offer so if there was a problem Apple would not be of any help.

So now I think I will just use my regular credit card and pay it off in January.

 

[bob_stan]

I bought my 2013 Mac Pro with a Barclay card. They tried to charge me interest each month in spite of the deal. It took several phone calls to get everything straightened out. I think I will go with the Apple Card, planning to pay off the purchase almost immediately.

 

[CWallace]

Barclays does but has anyone here used the Barclays card to buy a Mac?

I've bought three iMac 5Ks and plenty of iPhones and iPads using the SAC offers on my Barclay's card over the years. No issues or problems.

 

[thisisnotmyname]

The AppleCard does not offer that. Barclays does but has anyone here used the Barclays card to buy a Mac? I was thinking about it as an attractive option (in addition to vet discount) but Barclays reputation with other cardholders is very, very bad -- many online horror stories of mistreatment from people of all credit ratings. None that bought computers, however, and Apple does make it clear they are in no way involved with the Barclays offer so if there was a problem Apple would not be of any help.

So now I think I will just use my regular credit card and pay it off in January.

I'd take online tales about any credit provider with a grain (or massive pile) of salt. People having a great experience with their bank (even though that may be 99.99%) don't think "I must tell someone about this, TO THE INTERNET!!" People who are disgruntled often do.

 

[Korican100]

I told Barclay’s I would be making a purchase over $10k with the Mac Pro and inquired if I have special 18 months financing. They replied back and said after review,I was eligible. Then I had 60 days to accept the offer before it expired.

it seems the offer currently stands for new sign ups, and if you want it again, you have to request it.

 

[majus]

I'd take online tales about any credit provider with a grain (or massive pile) of salt.

Oh, I do. I have to wonder what their incentive is to offer zero interest financing if Apple isn't subsidizing that? It makes no sense unless they have undesirable business practices.

 

[ElectricPotato]

The Mac Pro appears to be the extreme case for this where the base model price and configuration is of effectively no value, though the upper-end is as close to "no limits" as a Mac has ever been.

The cost of a model that would not embarrass for poor value will be closer to $10K. But... that's in the ballpark of what well paid but not rich people can afford (assuming a 6+ year lifespan) and it would be a Mac than can do what other Macs can't. We will see if Apple can push back another pricing pain boundary for customers: $6K entry price for expandable and upgradeable may become the new Apple normal.

Or, it may crash and burn (outside of corporate, high end use). I'm curious to see which way it goes.

 

[basehead617]

Has anyone determined if the ibuildmacs.com pricing for options is going to be approximately the real pricing?

If so it's actually a lot cheaper than I expected.

 

[goMac]

The Mac Pro appears to be the extreme case for this where the base model price and configuration is of effectively no value, though the upper-end is as close to "no limits" as a Mac has ever been.

The counterpoint to Apple abandoning the upper-middle end is that they've pushed further into the high end, as some customers were demanding.

Yeah, the mid end users have been dropped. But this Mac Pro is far more high end than any previous Mac Pro tower, with far more expansion and capacity. It's a substantial upgrade for high end customers, with use cases that weren't possible in the old Mac Pro.

Four high end GPUs running at full link speed is impossible on a mid end tower, and was not possible on the classic Mac Pro.

That doesn't mean there is no market for a mid end tower. It just means the Mac Pro isn't the machine for that market. It's serving different customers with different needs.
[automerge]1574122790[/automerge]

Has anyone determined if the ibuildmacs.com pricing for options is going to be approximately the real pricing?

If so it's actually a lot cheaper than I expected.

It's _really_ hard to tell, especially in since they could be the ones performing the upgrades themselves with off the shelf parts.

They do advertise MPX modules though, which would have to come with Apple. But hard to tell how they would get pricing at this point.